RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $1680Goal: $3500

Talk:North American Free Trade Agreement

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Move to fun and replace with I can has mor serius NAFTA artikl? Secret Squirrel 07:37, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

How about just adding more SRS BSNS but keeping the funny stuff? humanUser talk:Human 12:09, 17 April 2008 (EDT)
But teh lulz lookz lik all about teh immigrashun and not teh NAFTA Secret Squirrel 07:17, 18 April 2008 (EDT)
Hmmm, I think that's because NAFTA, especially regarding the southern border, is inextricably tied up with issues of "human beings" as well as "money and goods"? Some of us think that an "open border" means more than just allowing mercantilistic exploitation across said border. But anyway, if/when we add a bunch of "facts" directly about NAFTA, they should come first, and maybe what's there already will end up under a heading like "What about the people?" or "Immigration issues"? humanUser talk:Human 12:47, 18 April 2008 (EDT)

We need a re-write.[edit]

No sources, and there needs to be a good description on pros and cons. Osaka Sun (talk) 09:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


This article is communist propaganda even by RationalWiki standards.

"However, they generally use the term "exploitation" in a vague and ill-defined way, roughly equivalent to any type of employer-employee relationship in which the employee is paid a low salary by American standards."

How is that "vague" and "ill-defined." It's called the American wage. Some people don't want it America to turn into mexico.

" In the end, after 1994 the U.S. experienced a long period of low unemployment, until around 2008 when the current financial crisis began"

The working class saw wage stagnation. — Unsigned, by: Clawclaw / talk / contribs

It's really hard to take you seriously when you're red-baiting. How is it communist to defend free trade in a capitalist society? That seems like the opposite. And one trade agreement isn't going to cause all middle class wage's to stagnate, correlation doesn't equal causation. ClothCoat (talk) 05:26, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, wages stagnated well before NAFTA. Osaka Sun (talk) 05:38, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Second call for a re-write[edit]

There are plenty of critics of NAFTA beyond conspiracy theorists, among them are Dean Baker, Dennis Kucinich, and Joseph Stiglitz, who happens to have won the Nobel Prize for Economics. Their criticisms are not conspiracy theories, even if others' criticisms are. Furthermore, we should remember that NAFTA, despite free trade being in it's title, is not about free trade, and that fact does not make it into our article. Rand0 (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2014 (UTC)